About your Search

20120901
20120930
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
." a short time later, the state department confirmed the u.s. diplomatic mission in benghazi, libya, was under attack. searches for the british monitoring group called it a well-planned assault that occurred in two wavs. the sources said the attack involved a group of about 20 militants and included heavy artillery, machine guns, and rocket-propelled grenades. by morning, it was confirmed that four american diplomats, including the u.s. ambassador to libya, christopher stevens, were killed in the attack. that makes stevens the first ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1988, when arnold raphael, the ambassador to pakistan, died alongside the president of pakistan in an unexplained plane crash. president obama addressed the nation from the white house rose garden this morning. about 50 u.s. marines were deployed to libya and two u.s. warships are headed towards the libyan coast. secretary of state hillary clinton addressed the sad irony of the attacks in the wake of the u.s. support of the libyan revolution. >> today many americans are asking, indeed, i asked myself, how could
. now to libya. the new government firing the security chiefs pour benghazi today in the wake of last week's attacks on the u.s. consulate there that killed ambassador chris stevens and they're other americans. they have two different versions of that attack. >> the way these perpetrators acted and moved, this leaves us with no doubt that this was preplanned. >> what happened in benghazi was, in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo. >> we're live from benghazi, libya. an fbi investigation now under way there. why the two versions? what are you hearing on that? >> reporter: well, they're talking about two different parts of process. on the libyan side of things, they look it from the point of the attack very deliberately in the ways the weapons were used and ammunitions were used. they were evacuated to a safehouse, and the armed gunman proceeded to follow the americans to that safehouse and continue attacking that second location, which was at a very undisclosed area, if you will, away from the embassy or the consulate. the americans
current assessment is that what happened in benghazi was, in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo, almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video. what we think then transpired in benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. they came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately, are readily available in postrevolutionary libya. and it escalated into a much more violent episode. obviously, that's our best judgment now. we'll await the results of the investigation, and the president has been very clear we'll work with the libyan authorities to bring those responsible to justice. >> was there a failure here that this administration is responsible for, whether it's an intelligence failure, a failure to see this coming, or a failure adequately protect u.s. embassies and installations from a spontaneous reaction like this? >> david, i don't think so. first of all, we had no actionable intelligence to suggest that any attack o
happened in benghazi, the fbi can't get within 400 miles there to examine the evidence which is already being destroyed, so it's going to be hard to make a case. what about this letter that you have sent asking for answers about what went wrong in benghazi? >> well i have the letter here with me. i could show it to you. i wouldn't change anything. let me be crystal clear as chairman of that committee, and i hope this gets out to other people who are listening about this. >> and i should point out i've got the letter here too. we've gone through it. >> republicans are working overtime to try to exploit a very normal, run of the course, admin strative letter that we agreed to on a bipartisan basis in our committee, simply to get some additional questions put in front of the state department that are part of their already existing investigation. this is not a challenge. it is nothing new. it is not something out of the ordinary. and i agreed to do it as a matter of bipartisanship because we thought these were important questions that people ought to be examining. >> but aren't you concerne
at benghazi and the embassies around the world, the question is why does that small group of muslims, radical muslims, hate sinus >> they want power. i think it's really a struggle for power, something that's going on in nearly every country across the region. in libya, you have a huge number of people who are out with signs professing their support for not just chris stevens who lost his life, you know, supporting peace and our relationship, but you have them saying, look, we apologize. same thing in several other countries. many of the leaders have expressed the same sentiments. and so i think we need to understand that as our country has local dynamics, these countries have local dynamics, too. and you have an emerging democratic movement. you also have these old regime loyalists, soccer thugs in the case of egypt, and even these, you know, more religious extreme elements where they're jockeying for power. >> what is it about america? why do they attack so violently, these groups? >> america is a symbol, right? america is a symbol. look who's keeping it up now. nasrallah in lebanon saying
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)